Echo chamber media: Kamala Harris crushed "Bret Panda Baier"

The day-after reaction by the progressive/Democratic/liberal media to Bret Baier’s interview of Kamala Harris on his FoxNews program rigorously followed the expected script. (See my posted parody yesterday about the script.)

Among the echo chambers’ responses were that Baier’s questions were rude, unfair, combative, disrespectful and contentious; he “recycled Republican talking points;” he frequently interrupted her; he’s a “right-wing lap dog;” “was more worried about what Fox News viewers and MAGA types would think;” “tried to play gotcha with Harris;” blah and blah and blah.

The media persons and their publications that were echoing these talking points included the New York Times, Washington Post, MSNBC and MEDIAITE. Clearly, they concluded that Kamala won,

(You can link to these remarks by going to Tom Jones, Poynter.com’s senior media writer. Jones has a liberal bias. The stupid “panda” name came from a goofy Don Surber who writes on Substack.)

It’s hard to know where to start with an analysis from the other side.

First, her response to some of the tough questions about immigration and transgender issues was a dodge, saying “I will follow the law.” As if that’s the president’s only job. That answer is naive and ignorant at best. People who know little or nothing about our government will find that response persuasive.

She was being asked her personal views on those issues, but in essence she said it doesn’t matter. That’s riotous. Personal views and opinions have been a critical issue for every president going back to George Washington.

It comes into play when she wants to change, propose or cancel a law. Joe Biden’s views on immigration certainly mattered when he opened the southern border to illegal aliens, err, pardon me, visitors. She obviously had the same view, as she accepted her assigned job as the head of immigration policies.

Never mind that presidents have a veto power over bills passed by Congress. By using it, or threatening to use it, presidents are directly involved in making law and policy. What she thinks about any policy or bill that might land on her desk for her signature is more than fair game; it is essential to the election process.

Second, claiming Brit was rude and too tough when asking his questions is silly and unreal. The knock on Kamala is that she hasn’t faced tough questions, certainly not as tough as those the press routinely tossed at Donald Trump. That’s what real journalists are supposed to do, but there are very few of those left. These days, most prefer to be lickspittles. Jeez, people; stop your whining.

Third, Kamala’s pathetic dodging and weaving when asked a direct question seems to have escaped noticed by her praisers. How many illegal immigrants have entered the country? A million? Three million? Her response didn’t come close to a real answer. Instead, she escaped into an aria about nothing. Her own administration has the numbers, but, of course, she doesn’t know that. And assume Americans are too stupid to look.

She’ll “turn the page” from what? On the last decade and Donald Trump, according to her, but not, we’re supposed to believe from the Biden administration in which she was second in charge.

Fourth, she conducted a filibuster, using up time that Baier could use to ask or follow-up questions. She arrived for the interview 15 minutes late, another tactic that also cut down on Baier’s available time.

Fifth, Kamala was deceptive. She kept referring to two immigration bills that she maintained would have cut down on the number of illegal immigrants. One was basically an amnesty bill introduced first thing in the Biden administration. It was a bad bill that neither Biden nor Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer pushed when Democrats had a chance to pass it. The second “bipartisan” bill that she keeps mentioning as a “solution” to illegal border crossings came later in the Biden administration. It wouldn't stop new illegal immigration and, of course, would do nothing about the millions that have already crossed thanks to the Biden-Harris administration.

At least Kamala didn’t appear as ignorant and stupid as Republicans had earlier portrayed her. Instead, she appeared to be well prepared to do weave, zig-zag, evade, jink and elude.

By that measure, she did herself more harm than good with independent voters.